The Natural Physics of Water Prove Earth Flat

I worked hours and hours in warehouses before, and what i can remember was that the concrete floor was flat and cold. So i posted "STRETCHING A WIRE OVER WATER", but it somehow is not to be seen? I am new to this and don't want to be banned... Well i'm trying to remain objective, say i use a cable/wire/line over a canal like that in oxford, without wind or waves. Across a KNOWN distance, i would use one or more lasers to control that the line stays straight, not moving to the left or right. This could even be done with poles along the way, letting the line go through the middle of the poles. The line would have to float on water. Now, if this would be done in a large enough warehouse the line could be sensitively be laid out in such a manner, that its distance would be just SO. No stretching whatsoever. Now, as the KNOWN distance is without curvature, if the line presents ANY sort of tension then there would have to be curvature to account for that. If the line lays out just fine then there is no curvature. Perhaps there is even a sort of material of the cable/wire/line that when stretched it changes color? Does this sound like a good idea? Has it been done before?

pragmatic wrote:I worked hours and hours in warehouses before, and what i can remember was that the concrete floor was flat and cold. So i posted "STRETCHING A WIRE OVER WATER", but it somehow is not to be seen? I am new to this and don't want to be banned... Well i'm trying to remain objective, say i use a cable/wire/line over a canal like that in oxford, without wind or waves. Across a KNOWN distance, i would use one or more lasers to control that the line stays straight, not moving to the left or right. This could even be done with poles along the way, letting the line go through the middle of the poles. The line would have to float on water. Now, if this would be done in a large enough warehouse the line could be sensitively be laid out in such a manner, that its distance would be just SO. No stretching whatsoever. Now, as the KNOWN distance is without curvature, if the line presents ANY sort of tension then there would have to be curvature to account for that. If the line lays out just fine then there is no curvature. Perhaps there is even a sort of material of the cable/wire/line that when stretched it changes color? Does this sound like a good idea? Has it been done before?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/KjsPjAdJrsjT/

pragmatic wrote:I worked hours and hours in warehouses before, and what i can remember was that the concrete floor was flat and cold. So i posted "STRETCHING A WIRE OVER WATER", but it somehow is not to be seen? I am new to this and don't want to be banned... Well i'm trying to remain objective, say i use a cable/wire/line over a canal like that in oxford, without wind or waves. Across a KNOWN distance, i would use one or more lasers to control that the line stays straight, not moving to the left or right. This could even be done with poles along the way, letting the line go through the middle of the poles. The line would have to float on water. Now, if this would be done in a large enough warehouse the line could be sensitively be laid out in such a manner, that its distance would be just SO. No stretching whatsoever. Now, as the KNOWN distance is without curvature, if the line presents ANY sort of tension then there would have to be curvature to account for that. If the line lays out just fine then there is no curvature. Perhaps there is even a sort of material of the cable/wire/line that when stretched it changes color? Does this sound like a good idea? Has it been done before?

I came across fishing braid that is advertised with a specific gravity (a measure of density btw) of .98. This means that the reverse catenary (sag) would be minimal and depending on temperature the water could be contained at exactly .98 itself. A far cheaper alternative to the Mullin's structure that we could never guarantee to be designed properly. IMO, this would be the argument against, regardless of refraction, should that project come to fruition.

I made the calculations,
"radius" of the earth = 6371 km
(pi/300)*6731 = 66.71695 km => with curvature
2(6371)sin((pi/300)/2) = 66.71665 km => straight
meaning if there is a curvature then the line should be short by 30 cm, after 66716 m.
Note that getting the KNOWN distance without curvature is the first step.

What are the calculations on the stretching of the wire? Over a known distance of 1 mile the drop should be 8 inches. And assuming that the wire could be stretched from both ends how deep under water would it be at half a mile?

pragmatic wrote:What are the calculations on the stretching of the wire? Over a known distance of 1 mile the drop should be 8 inches. And assuming that the wire could be stretched from both ends how deep under water would it be at half a mile?

2.04 inches IF the wire could be stretched to a straight line. But it cannot because of the catenary.

Any math whizzes in here? I am curious as to the reverse catenary over 1, 2, and 3 miles using fishing braid with a specific gravity of .98. I believe that we get really close if not perfectly straight with the right water temperature.

I just finished watching a lecture by Gerald H. Pollack, PhD, at a 2015 Electric Universe Conference.

https://www.patreon.com/posts/gerald-pollack-69782618?utm_medium=post_notification_email&utm_source=post_link&utm_campaign=patron_engagement

I tried this link using a different Gmial account and it did work, let me know if it doesn’t.

This is the text I copied from my email that summarizes the lecture.

He describes how water contains a fourth phase, which bears negative charge. When water evaporates, that fourth phase rises in the form of negatively charged aerosol droplets, while positive charge rises in the form of hydronium ions. The negative-positive combination may condense into clouds. In sunshine, the evaporated hydronium ions build high into the atmosphere, while at nighttime they hardly build at all; hence, horizontal charge gradients form at the day-night boundaries.
Jerry suggests that those charge gradients drive wind flow—perhaps the cause of terrestrial winds—and theorizes that the same forces acting to produce persistent winds may help to maintain the spin of the earth on its axis.

I think his ideas in this lecture also support the Flat Earth model. One obstacle to understanding a globe earth for me is why the winds are not 1000s of MPH across the surface of a spinning globe earth. But then from the FE paradigm what causes the jet steams to begin with. This lecture has valuable contributions to suggest why. IMO